If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I lost a 13 1/2 year old to bone cancer a couple of years ago. Vet said that was very common for Labs after 10 years old. It was in her left front leg between the shoulder and elbow. She was too old to amputate the leg so we just had to let her tell us when it was time. She lasted about 4 months with it but when it matastisized she couldn't take the pain anymore. The pain killers weren't even working anymore. When she hobbled up to me and put her head on my knee with that I need help look, we knew what we had to do. It was a long week in the Brou house. Got her ashes on the shelf and still miss her.

There are two spiritual dangers in not owning a farm. One is the danger of supposing that breakfast comes from the grocery, and the other that heat comes from the furnace…........If one has cut, split, hauled, and piled his own good oak, and let his mind work the while, he will remember much about where the heat comes from, and with a wealth of detail denied to those who spend the weekend in town astride a radiator.

I don't disagee with the idea that we should use products for our dogs that are "safer" than others. However, if you look at the past we have been told that sugar is bad for us so we use artifical sweetners . . . until they say that they are bad for us. And saturated fats are bad for us so they have us use partially hydrogenated fats . . . and then we find out they are bad for us. Of course coffee is bad for us . . . no, it's good for us . . . wait, maybe it's bad for us, but then again it isn't bad . . . or is it?

In the original article I counted 3 or 4 times that they said THEY DON'T KNOW whether the chemicals in bumpers are harmful to dogs. So, in the mean time I'd use some common sense. Don't feed plastic bumpers to your dogs! Maybe the canvas ones are a better alternative if you have concerns. However, I think on the scale of canine concerns this may not make the top ten.

The reason for my post is to draw attention to the possibility. You all can carry on and pretend all is right with the world and get slapped in the face quite easily . The last line of the article "Since little toxicity data exist for dogs, it is difficult to evaluate risks, Smith said. Nonetheless, “consumer education about potential risk seems to be warranted based on our data,” he said."

This is what I had to say about this the other day when this article was first posted.

------
"While I am all for keeping our dogs safe and healthy, there are some glaring problems with the implications of this report.

- There are no studies that indicate trace levels of these chemicals cause harm to dogs.
- The one study they cite that found higher levels of these chemicals in dogs than in humans could not determine the source(s), (i.e., they have not controlled for environment).
- This study acknowledged that chewing caused higher release of the target chemicals; bumpers are rarely used as chew toys and such use is typically against the manufactures recommendations. No levels were ID'd for chewing vs non-chewed. It could be that non-chewed exposure is at a level that is more acceptable.
- This study did not use real dog saliva and therefore any conclusions derived in reference to dogs is complete speculation.
- This is unpublished. That is to say, it is not yet verifiable "science" as it has yet to withstand the rigors of peer review.

The EHN knows all these weaknesses and yet they are irresponsibly propagandizing this since it fits their world view. Expected of an Environmental special interest organization.

IF it is found that there really is an immanent health risk then certainly I would expect bumper manufacturers will alter their manufacturing. But the way this is presently being reported is scientifically and socially irresponsible."
--------

Sure, there is a "Possibility" that plastic bumpers may have an issue, but until there is actual corroborated replicable scientific proof of such an issue, there is no need to cry wolf.
If we put stock in all the "Possibilities" we would not own dogs because there is the "Possibility" that it could rip your face off, there is the "Possibility" that you could get shot at a hunt test, there is the "Possibility" that the duck your dog is retrieving carries a disease or is high in mercury that could make your dog ill, there is the "Possibility" that you accidently choke on you whistle and die....the "Possibilities" are endless.

Don't put stock in a yet unscientific agenda driven report...if you do, there is a real "possibility" you'd be interested in some beach front property I have just down the road I would like to sell...the human capacity for gullibility is apparently also endless.